Hey! Let's "unschool" 'em! by Niki2

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Hey! Let's "unschool" 'em!

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Thursday, August 4, 2011 16:08
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1098
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 6:22 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Some may think this is a great way to "educate" the coming generations; I don't. It's like "the current system isn't perfect, let's just not have one at ALL!"

Quote:
Six-year-old Karina Ricci doesn't ever have a typical day. She has no schedule to follow, no lessons to complete.

She spends her time watching TV, doing arts and crafts or practicing the piano. She learned to spell by e-mailing with friends; she uses math concepts while cooking dinner.

Everything she knows has been absorbed "organically," according to her dad, Dr. Carlo Ricci. She's not just on summer break -- this is her life year round as an at-home unschooler.

"It's incredible how capable she is," Ricci said in a phone interview from his home in Toronto, Ontario. "And I think that all young people are that capable ... if you don't tell them they can't or they're not allowed, they surprise us in a lot of ways."

Ricci is professor of alternative learning at Nipissing University and an advocate of unschooling, a concept that's gaining popularity in both Canada and the United States thanks to frustration with the current public education system. In unschooling the child is in control of his/her learning. They are free to decide what they want to study, when they want to study it.

Experts say there are about 2 million home-educated students in the U.S., and Ricci estimates 10% adhere to unschooling ideals. In addition, there are more than 20 Sudbury schools -- private institutions that follow the same philosophy -- in North America. A new one is set to open in Toronto next fall. More at http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/08/03/unschooling.sudbury.education/index.h
tml?hpt=hp_bn1

I'm sure glad I won't be around when these "unschooled" generations are in charge!

Just for a minute, can you imagine what "subjects" today's youth would choose to "study"?

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 8:37 AM

DREAMTROVE

I'm in favor. Sounds great. No indoctrination, no prison, she has the internet, she has all the tools she needs. It's like raising a kid without any education, but doing so in a library.

This is basically the educational model that Joss is advocating in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which is a decent portion of the message, I thought. Ergo, I expect it to get a fairly warm reception here.

I mean, everyone has to have had something they identify with in Joss, and for me, this was certainly a big part of it, that, and the whole anarchy thing.

ETA: I don't have to imagine. I was raised very similarly. I studied all sorts of things, history, biology, warfare, rockets, i became a computer hacker at 13 and by 15 i got pretty heavy into economics. I wrote my own financial analysis software and was hired by two brokerages. I know, i should be rich, i was able to make the rich richer, but the rules are different if you're poor. I have alys felt confident I could turn a million into a billion, but haven't been able to get close enough to try.

The human race does fine without direction. Better, I swan.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 12:59 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Even when it comes to fracking? Do they really do better without any direction of supervision in ALL areas, DT?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 1:36 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

I was about to comment on the notion that I wondered if her father, the Doctor, got his M.D. in a home schooling environment. Then I read a little farther , and discovered that he's a PhD in, surprise, alternative education. SO maybe he did. ( Edit: I re-read the piece- it doesn't say that it says he's a professor of alternative education. Now I do wonder whether he's an MD , or a Phd in what?)

I get a little suspicious of people who use the title Doctor, who are not physicians of some sort, deeply trained, highly skilled, and experienced in dealing with Life and Death issues.

Feels to me like almost anybody else using the title, even if they have a PhD, is trying to hijack the respect and authority of the man in the white coat.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 1:47 PM

BYTEMITE

Um, it used to be the other way around, you know.

And surgeons weren't normally called doctor, most still prefer to be called Mr., Mrs., or Ms. just as a convention.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 2:41 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Even when it comes to fracking? Do they really do better without any direction of supervision in ALL areas, DT?

Mike,

Yes. If you mean the people doing the fracking, it is the large backing of the US govt. With force of arms which allows them to continue, they'd be killed in minutes without it.

But this is abiut education:

Do you really want a govt. appointed agency head creating curriculum guidelines for what should be discussed, read and researching in the energy industry?

The kid has friends. If they discover something, such as that their country is run by alien lizard men, they can organize against that, and inform themselves.

As for doctors, funny thaf. We're talking about public school. Have you kept track of exactly how much of the science of medicine is covered in a typical public school curriculum? I didn't go to school, and yet I got into medical school. (couldn't afford to actually go, and really wasn't up for half a million in debt to see it through either.)

A truly free society would allow everyone to make their own decisions at every point in their life, without mandates or contractual obligations. I would only add to that they also have the right to make an informed decision, and should be given a balanced set of all available data and arguments on which to make it, followed by a wide array of options. Poorly informed choices and lack of options are what creates so many of these country's problems, from their mountains of debt to their choice of leaders.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 3:03 PM

STORYMARK

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I'm sure glad I won't be around when these "unschooled" generations are in charge!

Just for a minute, can you imagine what "subjects" today's youth would choose to "study"?

Couldn't agree more.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 3:09 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
A truly free society would allow everyone to make their own decisions at every point in their life, without mandates or contractual obligations.

We're a long, LONG way from "a truly free society", and I think you know that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 4:17 PM

THEHAPPYTRADER

What if the child's household environment is not stable and does not include a computer, internet, or responsible parents? It happens more often than we might be comfortable with. For every one self taught prodigy there would likely be several more who's reading comprehension is abysmal (assuming they even want to learn how to read.)

If I were less busy I'd write more with supporting sources, but for now I'll just make it clear I think this is a very bad idea. It could work with dedicated parents and the right environment, but I think that is more often the exception than the norm.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 4:37 PM

BYTEMITE

Arguably all other concerns for parents are just a construct of society, and it's society's failure that parents don't spend more time with their kids.

But, that aside. While parents do often have a big impact on the education of their kids, it isn't all just parents either. Clearly, teachers can have a big impact, as can peers, and a kid who wants to learn will learn no matter what his environment.

Kids that don't, I think have probably been turned off somehow from learning, perhaps by an overly regimented system of learning that doesn't instill or develop the natural feeling of reward.

Example: I wasn't good at math until I spent some time with practice problems in a book that would list the right answers without showing the work required to get them. And then I realized that it was a puzzle, and that double checking the answer and trying again and again was fun, and that finally getting the math right is a nice rush. I didn't understand algebra until I graduated highschool, and I didn't understand this fundamental element of math itself until well into college, in a Calculus and Statistics class.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 8:45 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:
What if the child's household environment is not stable and does not include a computer, internet, or responsible parents? It happens more often than we might be comfortable with. For every one self taught prodigy there would likely be several more who's reading comprehension is abysmal (assuming they even want to learn how to read.)

If I were less busy I'd write more with supporting sources, but for now I'll just make it clear I think this is a very bad idea. It could work with dedicated parents and the right environment, but I think that is more often the exception than the norm.

I agree with the above.

Although I support child focused learning environments, I'd support changing the school system rather than taking kids out of it in most cases. I think kids need to develop some sense that they are not the centre of the universe and have to fit in with others, and encouraged to try a wide variety of activities. Many kids would just choose to use the internet all day long, and need structures to make sure that this doesn't happen.

While I think natural learning is great for smaller kids and I really hate the push in this country to push kids academically at a very young age, some where some time you are going to have to move out of your comfort zone and do things that make not come easily and willingly. Additionally, you can't learn everything over the internet or from mum and/or dad.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 8:46 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

I tend to agree with Niki here. Sure home schooling is allowed, as long as those kids meet certain requirements they're allowed to study and learn however their parents choose. I think that a small portion of children, the Benjamin Franklins and Abraham Lincolns among us, would do well learning this way, but the majority of people just wouldn't. If I'd been allowed to learn this way I wouldn't have learnt much since I hated maths and my parents didn't have all the tools I needed in order to learn to the best of my abilities. So I know I would have not done well in such a system, public school was the proper way for me to learn. Its not perfect and it could certainly use improvement, but its better than no structure for a majority of folk I figure.

That being said I do think that learning should be made more fun by making every day activities a way to learn, because I did indeed learn things from such actions outside of school. My little brother learns a lot from his own activities, but there are a lot of things he'd miss out on learning if he wasn't attending school with the other kids, both academically and socially. Is his school environment perfect? Far from it, but its something, more than he'd have otherwise.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 12:08 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Again, Sudbury model or Freeschools, best way to split the difference if the home environment isn't so compatible with learning.

Lemme make this point though, Niki - not to sound arrogant, but I happen to be damn clever, and have a greed for information which borders on obsessive, that DID NOT come from public school, because by about third grade, I wasn't LEARNING anything there but hatred for our society, our systems, and (at the time, till much later) humankind in general, I was just passing time in their fucking prison till I could bail out, which I did manage to do two years early, and WITH the credentials via serious loophole exploitation.

Point of that is, all of MY learning and education, the real knowledge, critical thinking, and the ability to APPLY it, came from the exact environment you fear will produce idiots, perhaps cause you've unconsciously bought into that children are lazy, children need a leash propaganda...
GUIDANCE, maybe, maybe not - depends on the kid, cause I damn sure would have mistrusted and resented it at the time as I was finding out more and more just how often, and how much, the adults and their society had fucking lied to me, and had already begun to consider them the enemy.
Not all teachers were, there were a few, Chaffinch, Dorsey, Zoller - who used to deliberately leave stuff he wanted me to read or thought I'd take interest of, in a certain spot after I had repeatedly "borrowed" (and returned) course materials several grades past where we were from that spot...
But most of em weren't "teaching" me anything but how abusive and flawed our so-called education system was, and I was actually *irritated* that having to go sit there and put up with their shit took time away from, and interfered with, my own ACTUAL learning.

Worth a note it was also during this period my mother had bagged a used set of encyclopedia britannica at a yard sale, and I was ecstatic even if it did take me all day and into the night to lug it home a couple books at a time - and was reading the whole goddamn set cover-to-cover including the atlas and appendixes.

Of course, the real bomb drop which started my warfare with conventional education was when I came upon the listing... "AntiFederalist".
NO mention of them WHAT SO EVER was in my history class, textbook or materials, and the Federalist Papers were touted as "our betters" simply explaining matters to us poor peons, and I had already noted certain critical flaws in the Constitution and wondered if anyone opposed it, only to be told pretty much no, by the teacher.

And thus did the guttering spark of both resistance and certainty in self-education get fanned into an all-consuming flame.

Of course, the inherent problem with freeschooled or unschooled kids is that they don't have that automatic servile deference to authority, nor do they have that programmed assumption that those in charge know what they're doing...

But yanno, I call that a GOOD THING, being, yanno, an ANARCHIST and all.

Just sayin.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 1:23 AM

DREAMTROVE

Happy and Frem make a very good point about the home not always being the best place. I was thinking of my home, and thinking this doc's home was similar, but of course, not everyone grew up there, some have war zones.

So yeah, there should be a place to go, but optional to go there, and multiple options, because school can devolve into a war zone as well for particular kids, just in terms of the social environment, regardless of the educational model.

Byte also makes a very good point: some people who influenced me were college professors, there should be go-to people to learn from, but not overlords. Many teachers in what little public school I did attend were very negative influences.

Politically, I think there's a bit of a danger in that the education system collectively promotes a warped world view of what Frem might call jackboot licking, which I think comes from the selective hiring in favor of that, particularly at the college level, and those college professors train teachers of the next generation.

Removing this element so we don't continue to turn out obedient minions for TPTB is an issue.

ETA:

I concur with the rerst of Frem's post, I had a very similar experience. I only went to 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th grades, but I graduated at 16 with a high school diploma, showing up only for regents and tests. The prison school system does teach feear of learning, but also, I think that the *good* teachers actually had a negative impact on me. For instance, I had a great english teacher in 4 th grade who introduced me to newberry award winner list, and that I shouldread them all. God, they were depressing, and so "life is pointless and also no fun" that the result was I gave up reading book length fiction. I really am not happy with that decision, but it was basically one I had to make as a ten year old, here was somethinng consuing most of my time, and made me unhappy, and was giving me a negative outlook on life. If I had continued to read books as I had been doing, I would have read more ultimately and I would have continued to read things that were fun and thought provoking like lord of the rings, narnia, watership down, etc which were not the approved social message pieces that sounder, bridge to terabithia et al were.

ETA2: Also, stuff that I read in school we never really discussed, and no one wanted to discuss them, except to share mutual hatred. Stuff like Narnia, which was not allowed in school, was christian propaganda, but everyone I knew who read them also knew that, and it was kinda blatantly obvious, and you just accepted that and moved on. (what annoyed me more was what was ripped off frlm standard faerie tales, but I digress.) point being, now, a kid would have a wide knternet community with which to discuss anything they read.

A footnote:

Last night I watched some television. It's been a while, but it struck me that the content has gotten really truly awful. Also, the shows on today are the same ones that were on ten years ago. Things are no longer turning over, which leads me to think that there is no longer any competition. Brain drain to the internet seems inevitable, and surely a good thing, but the resulting residue of a medium is pretty unwatchable, and is also feeding out the same sort of unithought nonsense as the school system.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 8:19 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
What if the child's household environment is not stable and does not include a computer, internet, or responsible parents? It happens more often than we might be comfortable with. For every one self taught prodigy there would likely be several more who's reading comprehension is abysmal (assuming they even want to learn how to read.)

...It could work with dedicated parents and the right environment, but I think that is more often the exception than the norm.

Bang on, Happy; that's my point exactly.

Do people here REALLY believe the MAJORITY of kids would "self-educate"? Hell, I can't even get adults to self-educate about bipolarity when they suffer from the disorder! Getting kids today to DECIDE to study isn't something I can imagine ever happening.

I also agree with Byte:

Quote:
While parents do often have a big impact on the education of their kids, it isn't all just parents either. Clearly, teachers can have a big impact, as can peers, and a kid who wants to learn will learn no matter what his environment.

And Magons:

Quote:
I'd support changing the school system rather than taking kids out of it in most cases. I think kids need to develop some sense that they are not the centre of the universe and have to fit in with others, and encouraged to try a wide variety of activities. Many kids would just choose to use the internet all day long, and need structures to make sure that this doesn't happen.

AND Riona:

Quote:
I think that a small portion of children, the Benjamin Franklins and Abraham Lincolns among us, would do well learning this way, but the majority of people just wouldn't. If I'd been allowed to learn this way I wouldn't have learnt much since I hated maths and my parents didn't have all the tools I needed in order to learn to the best of my abilities.

The same would be said about me.

I find it really amazing that so many would be in favor of this. I think that a lot of people on places like this ARE self-motivated (tho' gawd knows, not all!) and tend to see things from their own experience. But I don't believe that represents the majority of kids.

Quote:
perhaps cause you've unconsciously bought into that children are lazy, children need a leash propaganda...

No, Frem, because the environment today makes it more difficult FOR a child to be self-motivated. How much do you think most kids in the inner city would learn if they were left to their own devices? Many (if not most) don't get any support (much less structure) from their parents when it comes to education as it IS; given the necessity of joining gangs, school is one of the few things that might teach them some other way to think, and I truly don't believe children coming from the poor classes (except for the rare individual) would benefit from this sort of system.

Most kids today are more drawn to TV (still) and the internet...but not to learn, instead to play games. Yes, there is much to be learned by playing games, but a LOT of those kids just play games around violence or driving cars, etc., not things which relate to the real world. Where else do they get social interaction, except school and activities?

Sorry, nobody will convince me that kids will learn better if left to their own devices...not the MAJORITY of kids. There are many, many things wrong with our educational system, and you'll get no argument from me on that point. But to do away with it completely? I think we'd raise children who never develop social skills or learn the rudimentary things necessary to be part of society.

Do remember when debating this that we're not representational of the whole, or even the majority, in my opinion. Just glancing at the responses shows that several of us utilized this system to good advantage, so it's necessary to think in terms of other who wouldn't be motivated to do so. I believe that is a higher percentage than those who would be.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 8:36 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

DT: Re TV, I agree wholeheartedly. Most TV now seems to be the same thing, just with different actors and some kind of "hook" to make them seem different. But they're totally predictable and totally ridiculous. Beautiful women and men somehow involved in the legal system who nonetheless go out with guns and shoot the bad guys...I mean really!

TV nowadays seems to be most focused (if you don't count reality shows, which I don't!) on the legal system, be they someone in the police department, medical examiners (it's amazing how many medical examiners and others who in reality have desk jobs, on TV solve crimes and use guns). I remember when westerns were all over the channels; another time when hospitals were big, and others when sci fi "ruled". Sci fi has come back pretty big on cable, but what the networks offer seems to be take-offs on sci fi movies or cable shows.

I admit to thoroughly enjoying mindless TV, but only to a point. Most of it just makes me grimace and change the channel. The days when I could look forward to thought-provoking shows like West Wing, shows intended to be entertaining but which made one think if they wishes (like Buffy and Firefly) are long gone; today's fare is sickening. And bear in mind, what's left is an awful lot of what today's kids absorb.

When I'm not tuned into news, I watch mindless stuff like Dr. Who and Eureka (and 'cuz my bent is that way, sci-fi, thriller and disaster movies, even made-for-TV ones!), or animal shows like Dog Whisperer or a lot of what Nat Geo and Nat Geo Wild offer. I never tune into the networks, literally never except to watch Castle--although I realize it's rote and no different than a lot of cop shows, I enjoy it and of course Fillion is a big draw for me (and watching to see his cute call-outs of Firefly!). Otherwise, I have no idea except from commercials what the networks have to offer.

TV always has been and always will be entertainment a lot of people turn to after a hard day at work, as such I have no argument with it. My argument is that if they tried even a little, they could put forth entertainment that wasn't a draw to the lowest common denominator.

But DT, if you watched any TV from previous eras, I think you'd find most of it was the same, not any better and in many ways less sophisticated than what's out there now. It's virtually ALWAYS been mindless entertainment, only rarely does a show of actual substance draw enough viewers to run very long (Firefly being a perfect example of THAT, as well). There IS competition, but it's competition for the biggest audience, hence it will always be pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 3:25 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Well, again, split the difference - you really should look up Sudbury model schools and how they operate.

Ironically a lot of public schools tenatively explored the idea via vocational-technical classes, often referred to as VoTech, which was universally well recieved, run in a free-learning kind of method, and amazingly effective at teaching a handful of actually USEFUL skills which could serve not only to aid employment, but also help make those kids more self-reliant.

Alas, that in the round and round of budget cuts, that was always the program to go first, and it really ground my gears that VoTech is what my nieces school CUT in order to pay for those fucking cameras, which they now want to GET RID OF, after we more or less staged a technological coup and use them to monitor the behavior of the officials who had them installed to spy on the kids - bear in mind this was after a full year in which the presence of the cameras did nothing for the violence, crime and drug problem, but caused the quick and quiet removal of the assistant administrator (and the removal of a certain camera), and generally made the environment more oppressive and miserable - but when the parents started using the system to hold the teachers and administration accountable for acts of verbal and emotional abuse, suddenly now they want those cameras GONE, isn't that a funny thing ?

And still, the VoTech building lies empty and abandoned, education allowed to founder and lay fallow in the name of so-called security which is no such thing.

Show of hands, who took VoTech classes ?
Who considers that the most enjoyable part of their education experience ?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 4:08 PM

DREAMTROVE

I taught in one of those vocational schools for a couple years actually, much better, I agree. I looked up the Sudbury model when you sent it to me some time ago, looked good, very similar to what I had planned. Everything needs to be reviewed for any impact of technological changes, but I'll take another look if we actually get there, at the moment, I have to focus, too much stuff going on.

Vocational school had a lot less kid-kid teasing, which makes me think that pink floyd is right: public school encourage that behavior.

Niki, nah, i've seen tv, the sort of garbage that came in in the early 90s fed unacceptable behavior intentionally. You can call tv before that dumb, depraved, etc. But the animaniacs or tiny toons, even the simpsons behave in a way which is essentially normal, acceptable, and if kids go around the nouse saying Narf! Parents are not going to start a fight. Starting with stuff like ren and stimpy and south park, i felt kids were being encouraged to make gay jokes, say n*gger and faggot, etc. Beavis and butthead as well. This was not classy, it was a how to manual to fail, and parents were going to react to it. Also, reality tv, same thing. The idea that "this is how people really act" implying "this is how they should act" was an intentional attempt to feed self destructive behavior.

I can look at any program from the early cinema shorts to the last fully animated cartoons and i see very little in the way of change of the ethical cultural values. Point being: every exec knows that if their kid starts behaving ron howard whether in the andy griffith show or happy days, or like the fonz, or pinky and the brain, I don't think that any normal parent would really react with horror. It's a different kettle of fish when you start airing episodes about how Charles Manson is cool.

That's not to say the other isn't also brain washing, but it'sless destructive. Nothing disasterous socially is going to happen to a child whose idol is dr. Who.

This degenration is not cool indy productions rocking the status quo, it's carefully calculated garbage meticulously dedsigned to generate a negative developmental response, just as the news is designed to keep you uninformed and the reality shows are designed to make you think that normal human behavior is endless backstabbing, betrayal and hatred because the idea being conveyed here is that people are basically evil, which is a malicious message that serves the powers that be.

So, sure, there have always been cop shows that glorify the boot in your face, but they've moved to a whole new level: convincing you that humanity is scum.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE